Arresting a middle-aged writer in an evening gown for peaceable conduct is a far cry from when America was a free republic

Last night I was arrested in my home town, outside an event to which I had been invited, for standing lawfully on the sidewalk in an evening gown.

Let me explain; my partner and I were attending an event for the Huffington Post, for which I often write: Game Changers 2011, in a venue space on Hudson Street. As we entered the space, we saw that about 200 Occupy Wall Street protesters were peacefully assembled and were chanting. They wanted to address Governor Andrew Cuomo, who was going to be arriving at the event. They were using a technique that has become known as "the human mic" - by which the crowd laboriously repeats every word the speaker says - since they had been told that using real megaphones was illegal.

In my book Give Me Liberty, a blueprint for how to open up a closing civil society, I have a chapter on permits - which is a crucial subject to understand for anyone involved in protest in the US. In 70s America, protest used to be very effective, but in subsequent decades municipalities have sneakily created a web of "overpermiticisation" - requirements that were designed to stifle freedom of assembly and the right to petition government for redress of grievances, both of which are part of our first amendment. One of these made-up permit requirements, which are not transparent or accountable, is the megaphone restriction.

So I informed the group on Hudson Street that they had a first amendment right to use a megaphone and that the National Lawyers' Guild should appeal the issue if they got arrested. And I repeated the words of the first amendment, which the crowd repeated.

Then my partner suggested that I ask the group for their list of demands. Since we would be inside, we thought it would be helpful to take their list into the event and if I had a chance to talk with the governor I could pass the list on. That is how a democracy works, right? The people have the right to address their representatives.

We went inside, chatted with our friends, but needed to leave before the governor had arrived. I decided I would present their list to his office in the morning and write about the response. On our exit, I saw that the protesters had been cordoned off by a now-massive phalanx of NYPD cops and pinned against the far side of the street - far away from the event they sought to address.

I went up and asked them why. They replied that they had been informed that the Huffington Post event had a permit that forbade them to use the sidewalk. I knew from my investigative reporting on NYC permits that this was impossible: a private entity cannot lease the public sidewalks; even film crews must allow pedestrian traffic. I asked the police for clarification - no response.

I went over to the sidewalk at issue and identified myself as a NYC citizen and a reporter, and asked to see the permit in question or to locate the source on the police or event side that claimed it forbade citizen access to a public sidewalk. Finally a tall man, who seemed to be with the event, confessed that while it did have a permit, the permit did allow for protest so long as we did not block pedestrian passage.

I thanked him, returned to the protesters, and said: "The permit allows us to walk on the other side of the street if we don't block access. I am now going to walk on the public sidewalk and not block it. It is legal to do so. Please join me if you wish." My partner and I then returned to the event-side sidewalk and began to walk peacefully arm in arm, while about 30 or 40 people walked with us in single file, not blocking access.

Then a phalanx of perhaps 40 white-shirted senior offices descended out of seemingly nowhere and, with a megaphone (which was supposedly illegal for citizens to use), one said: "You are unlawfully creating a disruption. You are ordered to disperse." I approached him peacefully, slowly, gently and respectfully and said: "I am confused. I was told that the permit in question allows us to walk if we don't block pedestrian access and as you see we are complying with the permit."

He gave me a look of pure hate. "Are you going to back down?" he shouted. I stood, immobilised, for a moment. "Are you getting out of my way?" I did not even make a conscious decision not to "fall back" - I simply couldn't even will myself to do so, because I knew that he was not giving a lawful order and that if I stepped aside it would be not because of the law, which I was following, but as a capitulation to sheer force. In that moment's hesitation, he said, "OK," gestured, and my partner and I were surrounded by about 20 officers who pulled our hands behind our backs and cuffed us with plastic handcuffs.

We were taken in a van to the seventh precinct - the scary part about that is that the protesters and lawyers marched to the first precinct, which handles Hudson Street, but in the van the police got the message to avoid them by rerouting me. I understood later that the protesters were lied to about our whereabouts, which seemed to me to be a trickle-down of the Bush-era detention practice of unaccountable detentions.

The officers who had us in custody were very courteous, and several expressed sympathy for the movements' aims. Nonetheless, my partner and I had our possessions taken from us, our ID copied, and we were placed in separate cells for about half an hour. It was clear that by then the police knew there was scrutiny of this arrest so they handled us with great courtesy, but my phone was taken and for half an hour I was in a faeces- or blood-smeared cell, thinking at that moment the only thing that separates civil societies from barbaric states is the rule of law - that finds the prisoner, and holds the arresting officers and courts accountable.

Another scary outcome I discovered is that, when the protesters marched to the first precinct, the whole of Erickson Street was cordoned off - "frozen" they were told, "by Homeland Security". Obviously if DHS now has powers to simply take over a New York City street because of an arrest for peaceable conduct by a middle-aged writer in an evening gown, we have entered a stage of the closing of America, which is a serious departure from our days as a free republic in which municipalities are governed by police forces.

The police are now telling my supporters that the permit in question gave the event managers "control of the sidewalks". I have asked to see the permit but still haven't been provided with it - if such a category now exists, I have never heard of it; that, too, is a serious blow to an open civil society. What did I take away? Just that, unfortunately, my partner and I became exhibit A in a process that I have been warning Americans about since 2007: first they come for the "other" - the "terrorist", the brown person, the Muslim, the outsider; then they come for you - while you are standing on a sidewalk in evening dress, obeying the law.

My impression of Naomi Wolf is that she is a responsible writer about civil liberties (the loss of, specifically) in the US. I don't see anything in her account of this arrest that suggests she is a disinformation agent.

This and a thousand other arrests (and growing) in NYC will be played out in the courts. The protesters lawyers are threatening to demand a jury trial for every arrested protester unless all charges are dropped. It might get interesting. The authorities in NYC are getting really scared, not of violence (there hasn't been any), but that this might grow bigger.

I've no reason to believe that Naomi is part of the controlled opposition. I am welcome to hear why some of you are claiming this. I remember long ago that she has been predicting the closing of the state in regards to freedoms, and so far she has been right. I'm glad that she did not back down from the police, and handled her arrest with such grace. I only hope that I can be so courageous when they come for me, and surely they will, since I have been helping out with the Occupy Everywhere movement (Eugene OR.). I thought for awhile that the movement was co-opted by government or corporate influences, because a lot of the media was characterizing it is such a poor light, and the comments on many mainstream news sites were so negative. But, as fits my character, I had to see for myself, and make my own damn mind up about it. I've come to the conclusion that this movement is real, the people participating are seeing and feeling real democracy for the first time, and it is messy, but ultimately satisfying. I'm not 100% sure about anything, including Naomi Wolf, but I do applaud her here for this demonstration. Her response to such mindless behavior was elegant and inspiring. Was the whole thing scripted by some shadowy ultra-wealthy foundation? It's possible, but ultimately from first-hand experience, I conclude that it's highly unlikely. I am not scripted, and everyone I have talked with at the protest sites are not scripted. I also know personally many of the people at the Eugene location personally, who are helping facilitate the groups, and I can say with confidence that they are not paid-actors in any way, but genuinely concerned citizens much like myself, who know that something needs to be done, and while this may not be the most effective way, it is a start, and all changes have to start somewhere.

I don't think so. I found this: "I think every thoughtful citizen has noticed things that might raise questions. I'll just tell you that I met a firefighter two nights ago in Seattle who started a Firefighters for 9/11 Truth organization. And I have to say, just as a citizen, I trust the firefighters. I trust that they don't have an agenda. So, if they have questions, it leads me to think that legitimate citizens have legitimate questions." -Naomi Wolf
Full interview here [Link]
The whole interview doesn't lead me in any way to think of her as sketchy, read it yourselves and judge.

Her views on Israel are a bit harder to dig up, but I did find this in her defense: "I am just sorry that much of it is being spewed by organizations underwritten by the Israel lobby, who should abide by the core Jewish values of telling the truth, and promoting peace and mutual understanding, and instead are stooping to telling falsehoods and demonizing the “other” instead of seeking real dialogue." -Naomi Wolf
[Link]
She is Jewish as well, but that in of itself means little. The question I think that is really important is, "is she zionist?", and so far I cannot find any evidence supporting that.

Quote from the Shock Doctrine book pg 11 bottom of the page last paragragh.

"When the 9/11 attacks hit, The White house was packed with Friedmans disiples, including his close friend Donald Rumsfeld. The Bush team seized the moment of collective vertigo with chilling speed -not- as some claimed, because the administration deviously plotted the crises but because the key figures of the administration, vetrans of earlier disaster capitalism experiments in Latin America and Eastern Europe, were part of a movement that prays for crises the way drought struck farmers pray for rain, and the way Christian-Zionist end-timers pray for the rapture."

Mostly yes I agree. However, there are such things as scripted events that are designed with certain public people to elicit certain responses from people. Whenever I hear somebody question somebody's motives or character, especially on sites like these, I am moved to investigate a little further. In this case, I did not verify anything shady about Naomi Wolf. I have, and continue to respectfully admire her. As a poster said above, it is Naomi Klein who they were perhaps mistaking her with. Naomi Wolf actually has a great book and lecture on youtube called 12 steps to fascism, or something similar. It was made awhile ago, but it is very relevant to what has unfolded since. I suggest anyone watch or read it who hasn't already.